Comments

2

ChaosRocket wrote

When porn is posted online, there’s little way to tell if it’s actually consensual. There are frequent cases of porn getting pulled because it turns out one of the people in it is underaged. There are many stories of professional porn performers being forced or coerced into performing. You also can’t tell if the people appearing in porn may be too drunk or high to consent, especially if it’s just a still photo. There’s also the case of revenge porn being posted non-consensually.

Basically, how would we verify that the porn posted here contained only of-age people who are genuinely consenting? I don’t think Raddle is capable of ensuring that.

2

ChaosRocket wrote

I don’t like their government. I don’t agree with dictatorships at all, and they’re obviously not actually socialist or communist.

I do support their right to have nuclear weapons though. It’s hypocritical how the US doesn’t want any other country to have “weapons of mass destruction” yet somehow it’s fine for us to have them. Since the US obviously won’t get rid of their nuclear weapons, it’s probably good for as many other countries as possible to have them because then that keeps us in a stalemate where neither country is willing to attack the other. So it seems like other countries having nuclear weapons makes it less likely we’ll start another pointless war with that country.

1

ChaosRocket wrote

Maybe not super relevant, but kind of weird that the article uses “Patti Mayonaise” as a synonym for “white woman” when Patti Mayonaise (the character) isn’t white. The guy who originally drew her said he made her skin dark to “suggest ethnicity” (kind of offensive way to put it but whatever) and one of the writers on the show who was herself Puerto Rican said Patti is Puerto Rican.

6

ChaosRocket wrote

I haven’t watched daytime TV in many years- currently I don’t even have the ability to, since I just use streaming services and can’t get network channels- but the last time I watched daytime TV in the US it was pretty much exactly what you describe. Plus soap operas.

3

ChaosRocket wrote

Well I just keep my apartment clean as a matter of course. I don’t think it’s really considered a “goal.” Like, if someone asked me what my goals are and I said having a clean apartment, that would make it sound like my apartment is currently dirty and my goal is to get it clean. Keeping it clean consistently is just a standard of living, something I normally do, not a goal.

2

ChaosRocket wrote

What if you’re against having goals in principle because it just enforces the capitalist notion that you have to constantly be striving for better and more, constantly competing against yourself and others? Saying you should always have goals is saying you should never be content with what you have, you should always be dissatisfied.

2

ChaosRocket wrote

I don’t agree with this at all. Incestuous relationships involve power dynamics that make them abusive far more often than not. Also, even though a single generation of incest doesn’t involve TOO much more risk for genetic defects, multiple generations of incest definitely does. If it becomes legal and socially acceptable, it could happen enough to make that issue come into play.

It’s not social justice to defend people who want to have sex with their own children. Even if those children are now adults, that’s just an abusive dynamic.

9

ChaosRocket wrote

This will be better than the Reddit sub. The Reddit sub didn’t enforce the “no moralizing” rule, and like 75% of the comments were just jerks going “But what about the billionaires who own WalMart! Think about their feelings!”

2

ChaosRocket wrote

I really wonder what it is with straight cis men and the absolute obsession with boobs. You just don’t seem to see it with any other group that’s attracted to women- bi men, bi/straight trans men, bi/lesbian women...sure they LIKE boobs, but there’s just not this absolute, all-consuming obsession. You can always tell when any piece of fiction is written by a straight cis dude because it’ll just go on and on about boobs when they’re not relevant at all.

4

ChaosRocket wrote

Has the person who wrote this article ever seen Glee?

I don’t see how Brittany fits the “promiscuous bi” trope. She had a total of 3 sexual partners over the course of the series, all of whom she was in a serious relationship with. Is that really the bar for promiscuity?

Also Santana doesn’t fit the “straight to gay” trope at all. She was never straight- from the very beginning, she was in a sexual relationship with Brittany and was in love with her, but was in denial about her feelings because she feared Brittany didn’t feel the same way, and was in denial about her sexually due to internalized homophobia. So she has a few shallow sexual relationships with men to try to convince herself and others that she was straight. She was clearly never interested in the men- she would bring Brittany on all her “dates” with men and make out with her.

Her storyline was really clear that she was always a lesbian but was just in denial for a couple years as a young teen. As soon as she admitted she was actually in love with Brittany and not just “fooling around,” she also admitted she was a lesbian.

That’s a really, really common thing in the real world, for young lesbians to sleep with a couple men in an attempt to convince themselves they’re straight. Actually I think that’s more common than not, because of heteronormativity. I think it’s actually invalidating to lesbians to act like anyone who ever slept with a man as a young teen is automatically bi.